Holy Toledo Batman! Joe The Plumber Story a Fraud?

Say it ain't so Joe!!!

I heard part of McCain's new stump speech today...and he is claiming that "Joe The Plumber" will pay higher taxes as a business owner and high income earner under Obama's tax plan. McCain is claiming that Obama wants to take "Joe's" money and spread it around. McCain believes that "Joe" should keep his big bucks and shouldn't have to sacrifice anything. God knows he's suffered enough with the hard times on Wall Street... and shouldn't have to be burdened with anything Patriotic like paying taxes to help rebuild a nation in crisis....as was done after the Great Depression and after WWII with War Bonds, taxes for jobs programs, the New Deal, etc.

But there are a few really big problems with this entire story from McCain.

#1. Joe the Plumber is actually Sam the Plumber.

#2. Sam the Plumber is not actually a Plumber.

-- So now that leaves us with just a Fraud named Sam. Stay with me....

#3. Sam the Fraud is not a business owner... and he's not close to buying any business for which he will have to be concerned with paying taxes on.

#4. Sam the Fraud is not a high income earner. He admitted on 10/16/08, the day after the last debate, that he actually didn't make anything close to the amount of money ($250,000) that would be taxable under Obama's plan.

#5. Sam the Fraud is actually a tax dodger in the State of Ohio.

#6. It's not clear that a business earning $250,000-$280,000 per year would be taxed more... after payroll and operating expenses... he may not fall into the taxable category. But even if he did, the amount of tax on money earned above the $250,000 threshold would be nominal.
The truth is... the plumbing business that Sam was referring to does not even generate $250,000.00 per year in revenue anyway.

#7. Sam (the real Sam, not Joe the Republican creation) will actually pay less income Tax under Obama's plan than under McCain's plan.

To sum up-- what we have here is more BS from the Republican Party. The New York Times, and other News organizations (the few legitimate news services that we have left in this Country) have revealed Joe the Plumber to be a phony. At the least he was misrepresented as someone he's not. And now the McCain campaign is running with this lie as they have done with other lies throughout this entire election season. This is just the latest in a long string of lies. You would think that McCain would check the facts before he co-opts and hijacks a story for political gain... but once again, he has latched on to another fantasy (just like Palin).

As the New York Times has pointed out, Sam is not even a licensed Plumber...so if he's doing this kind of work without a license, he's working illegally. He's also not a member of the local Trade Union (Trade Union guys hate when phony people are stealing work).

So what we are left with, after all the BS, is a guy named Sam who is really a Republican Hack, who was sent to challenge Obama so that McCain could frame this issue and create this narrative for political gain (or someone who the Republicans saw as an opportunity)...either way, he's a hack.

I detected problems with this story early on. Something just didn't smell right. Notice the way that he initially approached Obama and mentioned a convenient figure of "$250,000.00" (he quickly realized his mistake and changed it to a higher number). This seemed too rehearsed. You mean to tell me that the business that he wants to purchase (that he's not really going to purchase because it was a BS story) just happens to cost $250,000.00.... the same amount as Obama's income tax cutoff? Far too coincidental. And wasn't it interesting how much attention McCain gave to it during the debate (and now on the Campaign Trail)? Seems to me that this was all thought out as a strategy before the debate.

Read an interesting article from the San Francisco Chronicle

Keith Olbermann Helps Debunk the "Joe The Plumber" Nonsense


I have a feeling that we'll be hearing more about Joe ...or Sam in the next few days. Of course McCain/Palin will be talking about him.... but that's not what i'm referring to. I'm hoping to hear more confirmation about how much of a phony story this was.

On my drive home tonight.... I was listening to BBC news...and they were in a frenzy over this story as if it was some sort of game changer for John McCain... I guess the Brits haven't received the news that it's a phony story.

Open Thread: Presidential Debate #3 - Hofstra University

Well, tonight is the final one.

Let's discuss.

The Second Debate - What's The Verdict?

What are your thoughts about the Town Hall Debate?

It didn't look like McCain did what he needed to do - Hit a Grand Slam Home Run.

Obama appeared just as comfortable with this format as he does with the more structured debate format. On the other hand, the Town Hall format was supposed to be an advantage for McCain.

This time around Obama did a better job of not allowing McCain to get away with misstatements. But I wish he would have mentioned that McCain (in the recent past) has called for cuts to Medicare and for putting Americans' Social Security on Wall Street.
That would have crushed McCain, IMO. But once again, Obama allowed McCain to go unpunished on his past statements. Obama also failed to point out that McCain's BS $5,000.00 coupon for healthcare would not be enough to cover the medical costs for Americans.


**************************

UPDATE

Instapoll results from CNN

Who did the best job in the debate?
McCain (R) 30
Obama (D) 54

Opinion of Barack Obama (before debate)
Favorable: 64 (60)
Unfavorable: 34 (38)

Opinion of John McCain (before debate)
Favorable: 51 (51)
Unfavorable: 46 (46)

Note: Notice no change in the favorable/unfavorable for McCain. This is not good news for Mr. Straightalk. He had to move his favorable numbers up quite a bit tonight.

This is Devastating info for McCain!!! But it just means that they will probably continue to go negative on Obama, because that's all that McCain/Palin have going for them right now.

From CBS

Who won?
McCain (R) 27
Obama (D) 39
Draw 35

Will Obama will make the right decisions on the economy?
Before debate: 54
After debate: 68

Will McCain will make the right decisions on the economy?
Before debate: 41
After debate: 49


Obama did better than I thought (yes, i'm always hard on Obama, because we have to jump higher, run faster, and work harder just to be on equal ground).

My favorite quote from Obama tonight was when he responded to McCain (I forgot on what question) saying that a wheel had fallen off of the Straight Talk Express. lol.
That may have been the quote of the night.

********************************

UDPATE 2

More from CNN snap poll

Who expressed his views more clearly in the debate?

Obama 60
McCain 30

Who spent more time attacking his opponent?

Obama 17
McCain 63

Who seemed to be the stronger leader?

Obama 54
McCain 43

Who was most likeable?

Obama 65
McCain 28

Best Review of the Debate

I think this review by James Fallows is on point:

On strategy and tactics
27 Sep 2008 02:47 pm

The least self-aware moment for John McCain in last night's debate came at the half-way point, when he said, "I'm afraid Senator Obama doesn't understand the difference between a tactic and a strategy."

In a sense McCain was sticking to his battle plan in saying this -- the plan being on-message hammering-home of the "Obama doesn't understand" theme. In another sense, he lost his way, since he immediately segued not into a discussion of strategic matters in Iraq and Afghanistan but into an anecdote. But that kind of literal parsing of his answer -- tactical analysis, you might call it -- really misses the point.

There has been no greater contrast between the Obama and McCain campaigns than the tactical-vs-strategic difference, with McCain demonstrating the primacy of short-term tactics and Obama sticking to a more coherent long-term strategy. And McCain's dismissive comment suggests that he still does not realize this.

Some examples are so familiar as to need no explanation: McCain choosing the ten-day tactical "bounce" from the surprise choice of Sarah Palin, in exchange for the enormous strategic risk in choosing an un-vetted and now obviously unqualified running mate. Or McCain rolling the dice with his threat to boycott the debate -- and then, once on stage, appearing to be only mildly interested in the financial-bailout deal that 72 hours earlier was the stated reason for overturning all agreements about the debates .

But the personas that the two men chose to present in the debate indicated the difference in a profound way. The truths of debates are these:

Emotional messages, which are variants on "how do I feel about this person?", are all that matter in presidential debates. Issues discussions are significant mainly to the extent they shape these impressions. For instance: a candidate's view on the economy feeds the impression of whether he sympathizes with "people like me." Or views on foreign policy feed the impression of whether he would be "a leader we can trust."

Barring a truly disastrous performance, each side's partisans will think their candidate did well, and will be reinforced in the reasons for supporting the person they already like. Thus John McCain supporters will think he sounded confident and masterful; Obama supporters will think he kept presenting the big-picture perspective on national security and the economy. Which means therefore:

The audience that matters is people who start out undecided or uncertain -- and finally are looking for emotional reassurance about who they can imagine as president for the next four years. In general, such viewers are only now starting to pay serious attention to the campaign -- in contrast to people already committed to helping (or stopping) one of the candidates. That is why the first debate is a unique "re-launch" opportunity for the candidates to present themselves to people who realize it's time to make up their minds.

Everything John McCain did on stage last night was consistent with trying to score tactical points in those 90 minutes. He belittled Obama with the repeated "he doesn't understand"s; he was explicitly insulting to him in saying at the end "I honestly don't believe that Senator Obama has the knowledge or experience" for the job (a line Joe Biden dare not use so bluntly on Sarah Palin); and implicitly he was shockingly rude and dismissive in refusing ever to look Obama in the eye. Points scored -- in the short term, to the cheers of those already on his side.

Obama would have pleased his base better if he had fought back more harshly in those 90 minutes -- cutting McCain off, delivering a similarly harsh closing judgment, using comparably hostile body language, and in general acting more like a combative House of Commons debater. Those would have been effective tactics minute by minute.

But Obama either figured out, or instinctively understood, that the real battle was to make himself seem comfortable, reasonable, responsible, well-versed, and in all ways "safe" and non-outsiderish to the audience just making up its mind about him. (And yes, of course, his being a young black man challenging an older white man complicated everything he did and said, which is why his most wittily aggressive debate performance was against another black man, Alan Keyes, in his 2004 Senate race.) The evidence of the polls suggests that he achieved exactly this strategic goal. He was the more "likeable," the more knowledgeable, the more temperate, etc. (Update: though from here on out he doesn't have to say "John is right..." anywhere near as often as he did last night.) .

For years and years, Democrats have wondered how their candidates could "win" the debates on logical points -- that is, tactics -- but lose the larger struggle because these seemed too aggressive, supercilious, cold-blooded, or whatever. To put it in tactical/strategic terms, Democrats have gotten used to winning battles and losing wars. Last night, the Democratic candidate showed a far keener grasp of this distinction than did the Republican who accused him of not understanding it.

Why He Makes Me Wanna Holler and Throw Up Both of My Hands

I listened to tonights debate while at work...and I have to say, I am mad as Hell. I'm beside myself. I had to reach for my Excedrin (thank Goodness for this wonder drug) before I even got home, to soothe my Migraine.

I couldn't believe what I heard tonight. After what happened in Mississippi finally sunk in, my anger turned towards Obama's staff... Who in the Hell is advising this man? It is clear to me that it may be time for David Axelrod and David Plouffe to step aside. Can't we get James Carville or someone else with a little backbone to take a leading role in the Obama campaign? Completely removing and replacing Axelrod and Plouffe may not be the best answer, but they could at least bring someone else in to take over strategy, while Axelrod remains as a figurehead. The team that is coaching Obama for these debates could definitely be shown the door...or could at least be shaken up somewhat. What I have seen thus far just doesn't cut it for me. The Nice Guy (i'm scared to grow a pair) routine must end.

Obama did o.k. tonight... but o.k. isn't enough when you are going against the traditionally ideal default President from the incumbent Party.... in a Nation so reluctant to change. Obama did o.k. when he had a golden opportunity to hit a Home Run (Hell.. a few Home Runs for that matter). It's like Barry Bonds taking pitches from an elder League pitcher in the game of his life... but passing up the opportunity to knock one out of the ballpark. Instead, he settles for a base hit.

What do I mean by default President? Well, American voters have been conditioned to be more open to White men for the Presidency. It is assumed that a White man will be better for the Country... and it is an intrinsic assumption, built into the American cultural fabric over the years. White candidates have an advantage with the American people just by default... especially when the opponent happens to be Black. And as in most competition, (let's use Boxing as an example), you have to knock off the champion in convincing fashion if you want to take the title. A draw just won't do. Obama and his staff should understand that he will always have the burden of proof. This is an ugly fact of American politics. All McCain has to do in these debates, as the default character, is show up...not pass out, and sound halfway competent. That's his only burden. Obama, on the other hand, must sell himself to the American people at all times....even if the polls appear to be in his favor, and even when it appears that he's on the right side on the issues, and on the right side of history. Obama has to explain to voters why they shouldn't pick the comfortable default candidate, and why they should choose him instead. That's always a tougher hill to climb.


What Obama needed to do tonight, ...and what his primary focus should have been, was to use his talent as a Harvard trained lawyer to clearly and methodically connect the dots for the American people between John McCain and the financial crisis on Wall Street (and Main Street). Obama should have done this straight out of the gate tonight...and nailed it down within the first 10 minutes. The whole World was Obama's courtroom, with McCain as the defendant. But Obama dropped the ball. He didn't even make the effort. This was Obama's big chance to corner McCain.... he had him right where he wanted him, but he let him go once again. The open debate format was yet another gift for Obama, but he didn't take advantage of the opportunity. Obama has done this several times before, but this takes the cake. There was nothing about McCain's history of pushing for deregulation of Wall Street, which helped lead to this disaster... nothing about one of McCain's top economic advisors, Rick Davis, being a big money lobbyist for Fannie Mae & Freddie Mac at the same time that he was advising McCain.... nothing about McCain's attempt to hijack events surrounding the crisis for political gain... a gamble that turned into a failure for McCain (since his presence in Washington D.C. and his attempts to politicize the crisis only made matters worse, not better...and because he had to backtrack at the last moment and attend the debate after all...after Obama called his bluff)... This was Obama's chance to crush McCain.

In the second half of the debate- on the topic of foreign policy - McCain actually held his own, and may have even beat Obama. All in all... this debate, from my independent perspective, appeared to be a draw. Neither candidate will likely be harmed too badly or benefit much at all from the events tonight. However, this was a debate that Obama could have, and should have won convincingly. McCain may actually see a slight bounce from this debate... I wouldn't be surprised to see the polls tighten again in McCain's favor in the next few days...but it probably won't last long. Everything, at the moment, seems to be overshadowed by the events taking place in the economy.

Some post-debate polling shows that Obama did well among independents. But it's hard to know if these particular independents were planning to vote for Obama anyway. I think Obama has good will points that he has earned over the last 2 years, and the current economic situation to thank for his good poll numbers after this debate. Those good poll numbers are not likely due to his performance in Oxford Mississippi.

How in the World could Obama's staff, and his debate prep. team in particular, not allow their candidate to paint the right picture of John McCain? It is beyond comprehension. Not only did they fail on that front, but they allowed McCain to bounce off of the ropes several times to take some great shots at Obama. McCain was allowed to reframe the debate, and turn attention away from himself...and back onto Obama... when it should have been all about McCain and his complicity in the current financial mess. Some Americans watching the debate and not really knowing the issues or the candidates all that well, could have easily walked away with the idea that McCain is some sort of anti-corruption, anti-lobbying watchdog who is looking out for the best interests of tax payers. Nothing could be further from the truth.

How in the world could Obama allow himself to be matched (tied) or beaten back by a senile, 72 year old man who out of touch with the realities faced by working Americans?

Luckily Obama has two more chances to go after McCain... and that walking disaster named Sarah Palin could also help Obama next week. I have my fingers crossed that Biden won't ----- up.

Again... all McCain and Palin have to do in order to look good at these events is to just show up. They get a B+ or A- just for that. Biden has to beat this woman without being perceived as overbearing. He has to do his thing with a smile on his face.

Is it November 4th yet?

Carry on....

Debate Open Thread

Sorry I'm late. What do you think about it?

GOP candidates snub Univision

From Politico.com

GOP candidates snub Univision
By: Gebe Martinez Sep 9, 2007 08:40 AM EST



When Fox News and other English-language television networks extended presidential debate invitations earlier this year, Republican and Democratic primary candidates
asked for the details.

But when Univision–the Spanish-language network with the top-rated local newscast in 16 media markets–scheduled an historic GOP debate on Latino issues for Sept. 16 in Miami, a week after a similar forum for Democrats, only
Arizona Sen. John McCain accepted.

What’s worse, in the eyes of national Hispanic leaders and progressives who are keeping count, this is the third time in recent months that Republican presidential candidates have dissed the fastest-growing part of the electorate by passing up chances to address Latinos’ concerns about the Iraq war, health care, the economy and immigration.

The major Republican candidates also refused invitations to address NCLR, the National Council of La Raza, at its annual conference in July. In June, the only Republican to show up at the convention of the National Association of Latino Elected & Appointed Officials was California Rep. Duncan Hunter, the patron of the border fence along the U.S.-Mexico border.

The Republicans’ slight of Hispanics “is very unusual,” said Cecilia Munoz, vice president of NCLR, who noted that President Bush spoke to the group when he was a candidate in 2000.

“It’s not just that they are not coming. It’s that some of them are visibly insulting us,” Munoz said, noting the party’s vitriolic message against legal and illegal immigrants in the presidential campaign and also on Capitol Hill, where Republicans are trying to introduce anti-immigrant language into unrelated measures.

“It’s very hard to imagine how some of these candidates are going to turn around and ask us for our vote” when the eventual GOP nominee is facing the Democrat in the general election, Munoz said. “It’s tremendously distressing and it’s not just immigrants who are feeling this disrespect,” she added.

All three forums were staged in Florida, a huge 2008 election battleground where the usually reliable Republican vote among Cuban-Americans is beginning to diminish. as younger Cuban-Americans are breaking from their parents’ political loyalties to the GOP, and the number of non-Cuban Hispanics is increasing.

While Univision scrapped the Sept. 16 debate after only McCain accepted, there is still faint optimism inside the network that other Republicans will eventually agree to attend at a later date.


A network spokeswoman noted that Republicans also hesitated in signing up for the unconventional CNN/YouTube debate, which now has been rescheduled for late November.

But many others doubt the major Republican candidates other than McCain will find time in their schedules for the Spanish-language network that reaches 80 percent of Hispanics nationwide. The University of Miami is co-sponsor of the debate.

The Romney and Giuliani campaigns did not respond to inquiries about their participation.Perhaps Republicans wondered –as did Democrats--how their words would be translated for a Spanish-speaking audience.

Democrats knew that two in their field–New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson and Connecticut Sen. Christopher Dodd–are proficient in Spanish, and did not want them to have an advantage. Imagine a candidate having to ask: “Como se dice comprehensive immigration reform?”

Debate organizers settled on a format for the Democratic forum Sunday night that requires candidates to answer in English. (The questions will be asked in Spanish and interpreted into English. The candidates’ responses will be in English and interpreted into Spanish for the television audience.)

Simon Rosenberg, president of NDN, a progressive group that helped bring together the Univision debates, said that by staying away, “Republicans really are writing off an enormous part of America in the 21st century. It’s not a good strategy from a policy or political standpoint.”

Republican and Democratic strategists agree that in order to win the White House, the presidential candidate must receive at least 40 percent of the Hispanic vote. Hispanics are expected to make up 10 percent of the total vote in 2008.

GOP candidates seem to be following the conclusion of its conservative base that the party cannot win over the Hispanic vote, Rosenberg said. “I think we will look back on this time and it will be seen as one of the greatest strategic blunders in American history,” he added.

Well, I don't know why the Hispanics are so surprised. They might be, but I'm not. Any group that are whining about a Youtube debate, certainly can't come forth and defend their positions to an audience that might actually ask serious questions.

It's September 9, 2007. Tavis Smiley is supposed to have his All-American Presidential Forum at Morgan State on September 27th. Now, WHO hasn't accepted?

Ah yes, Rudy and Flipping Mitt. Even Fred Thompson has accepted. Of course, the entire thing is suspect to me because Tavis didn't even ask for questions from the public from this one. What are they afraid of, hmmmmmm?

Do you know, that with all the opportunities to speak in front of Black audiences, the only one who accepted was Tancredo? How pathetic is that?

So, Univision shouldn't be too surprised, that's all.

Gay the New Black?

Now I have heard everything, The Gay Presidential Debates? Why the Gay Presidential Debate? There are a lot of black folks who cringed when moderator Margaret Carlson compared the gay rights movement to the black civil rights movement.

Pam of Pam's House Blend get's the Gay Presidential Debates. She says, "Never in the history of American politics have presidential candidates been brought together to debate ?gay? issues. Pretty exciting stuff." More HERE. But everyone is not in agreement. The Gay Patriot has asked "Did you react so ferociously when the Blacks had their own special rights debate?" .... Why is everyone claiming this is a “first” presidential Gay Debate? More HERE

Even BET is asking questons to black viewers wondering if the Presidential Debate should focus on gay issues. On the other hand groups like The National Black Justice Coalition feel that America finally spoke up. If America spoke up there is black and white disagreement who won the Gay Presidential Debate. As an example E.J. Graff, of The Nation has a lot to say about what Democratic presidential candidates talk about when they talk about lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender issues? Regarding the Gay Debate he says, Edwards hit it out of the park. Hillary got smartly on base, to wild--even excessive--cheers. Obama struck out. Check out his article HERE. While others were not impressed like Media Matters, that wrote, "They came, they saw, they pandered."

Yet the whole Gay Debate issue is taking another turn in black communities. As an eample, some in the black community asked even before the debate started if the “gay debate,” focusing solely on LGBT issues would likely ignore issues specific to the black gay community. More HERE Now after the debate black bloggers like Jasmyne Cannick see a lot of it as Pomp and Circumstance, she writes, " I think it’s great that Obama has addressed this issue outside of gay forums and within the Black community specifically Black churches, but I am not sure how effective he can really be in those forums when he himself Read More HERE.

Both Skepitical Brotha and Stereohyped are blogging about this issue as is Keith Boykin who says, "We've had a black debate, a labor debate, a CNN debate, an MSNBC debate, an Iowa debate, a New Hampshire debate, and even a YouTube debate. Next month Univision, the fifth most watched network in America, is sponsoring a Hispanic debate that they plan to simulcast into the Spanish language for their viewers. Only Bill Richardson, Chris Dodd and John McCain have agreed to participate in that one. But tonight, Logo, the gay channel owned by Viacom, is sponsoring a gay debate with all the Democratic candidates. Is this too many debates?

Watch the Yearly Kos Presidential Debate

Intro


Watch The Debate in 3 Parts

Part I

Part II

Part III

Another love fest for the Democrats....

Hillary Clinton continues with her lies in Part II (About pulling troops out of Iraq).

Democratic Forum - Talking loud an saying nothing PART II

The political talking heads were all there. All the Democratic candidates, You know all the names. Tavis (prime time) Smiley moderated while Dewayne Wickham, Michelle Martin and Ruben Navarrette asked questions. It was the first time a panel of journalist of color got a chance to asks questions of the candidates.

The questions were loosely based on Tavis Smiley’s book The Covenant With Black America. The outgoing Howard University President welcomed the crowd, while syndicated talk show host and party man, Tom Joyner introduced newly elected Massachusetts Governor Deval Patrick. YES!

The first issue for discussion was Education and matters of race.

First up, the ever condescending Hillary Clinton who gave her bogus and insincere diatribe about today’s Extreme (Supreme) Court ruling, and her need to say “there is work to be done.”

AAPP - OK, as if Black America needed you to tell us this.

Next up, Joe (Obama is the first bright, clean and articulate man) Biden talks about what a great job he (himself) has done as a member of the Judiciary committee grilling Supreme Court Justice, John Roberts, and how it's the Roberts court that has turned the clock back. Hey and let's not forget Bill (I’m Latino-don’t get my last name twisted) Richardson who stressed, the next president needs to lead a dialogue on race. But provided nothing concrete other than the president needs to talk about race.

I was feeling John Edwards, who was one of the few "sincere" candidates at the forum. He at least admitted that there continues to be a dual public school system in America - one for the affluent, and ones for the poor.

Hello, Brown V. Education 2007.

Let’s not forget brother Barack Obama who received applause every time he smiled. Yes it was clearly an Obama crowd at this Forum. but maybe not Obama’s night.

Obama tried to say there should be mutual citizen and government action to get us where we are going as Nation regarding education.

OK, Obama sounds great, but, no strategy, no plan just smiles for the cameras. Oh yeah, there are other candidates like Dennis Kucinich who pointed out the need for universal kindergarten and day care. Hello!

Hey let us not forget about the blue eyed soul 2nd cousin, Mike Gravel.

What, you ask, "who is Mike Gravel," hey, this is the only guy who calls it the way it is, and talks about the real issues like the alleged War On Drugs, that caused the disproportionate number of black men and women to be behind bars.

Hey, what about the silver haired “certified” liberal, Chris Dodd. Dodd who has no chance of getting the nomination, sounded like he read the playbook from his look alike, Jack Kemp.

You get a sense of the discussion. Clinton with “It takes a village to raise a child..” which she stole. To clinton saying the village has failed its children. No Senator Clinton “America” destroyed its children. She makes me sick with that old school, “socioeconomically deprived” crap. But I have to wonder what type of drug Gov. Richardson and others were on when they responded to the HIV question.

Did you check out how Richardson continued to talk about “Needles.” Are black teenagers throughout America using needles to cause the high numbers of HIV? My understanding is it is un-protected sex. (education) not needles dude.

Hello this man is misinformed. Hey, Obama, was on point regarding HIV and homophobia issues in our community and the need for universal health care. Kucinich was on point regarding the need for sex education.Hello, Richardson, who ever your handlers are they did a bad job about coaching you about HIV and the black community. I like Chris Dodds approach regarding school-based clinics where children can get advice on sex education. But I’m not sure Chris Dodd is up on recent events. The Extreme Court has sent us back 50 plus years. We will be glad to have a toilet in the next 5 years. Here comes Hillary, If HIV/AIDS were the number one cause of death for white women a lot more would be done.

Hap hap, people are we!. The black women scream, yes, yes, she identifies with us! Yes, I’m voting for Hillary! YES, there is a God. Great one liner Hillary you got the black women vote. At least the one’s here who gave you the evenings only standing ovation. WHAT!

Oh, hell to the no, says Biden. You are not going to out do me Hillary!

Hey black guys, In my state I have gone into the black neighborhoods in Delaware talking to black men about wearing condoms. what! See Brotha’s I know whats going on in the hood. Biden even says, hey, I even got tested for HIV, hey, Barack Obama did too! Holy Shit! What the hell!

It went down hill from there.

That’s how it was for the rest of the night. Pointless.

Tavis Smiley attempted to have the Democrats come to the black community to have them address issues of importance to us. Unfortunately, the format sucked, and as usual the Democrats brought us a circus.

It was the Barnum and Bailey circus at it’s best. And black folks, lead on by aging black leaders watched the three ring circus and clapped, and watched, and clapped, and watched, and clapped.

We watched as Democrats gave us a dog and pony show, with an invisible dog and pony. I would have loved to enjoy the stupid pet tricks. No commitments just hollow words. The Covenant With Black America had no meaning at this forum. The little meaning available was Tavis Smiley (new school) and a bunch of old school black political opinion makers and civil rights icons having the opportunity to shake hands with a number of Democratic candidatess. WOW! If there is truly any meaning in that!

Hey, but guess what, we have a Latino and a African American running for the presidency of the United States. A clueless and confused group of people who proved last night, they have no idea how to truly address America’s issues that are Black, white, and gray.

The bottom line was, for me, the forum was truly just another Barnum and Bailey - Democratic Circus, with the best financed clowns money can buy. I only wish they had graduated from clown school and rehearsed their skit, so this African American Political Pundit could have at least enjoyed the show.

Tavis, maybe next time, with the Republican event you’ll ask the Universal Soul Circus to come to town. We can at least get a laugh when the bigoted Republican Circus comes to Baltimore.

Candidly, I can’t wait to see who they put in the front seats of that circus! Colin (WMD) Powell, or Clarence (you blacks stay in your poor schools) Thomas?

Democratic Presidential hopefuls “talk loud and say nothing” as aging black leaders look on

African American Political Pundit says: Last night reminded me of the old schoool lyrics of Kurtis Blow, as all the old school black leaders and opinion makers sat and clapped for every no substance comment made by the Democrats.

You remember the lyrics: Clap your hands everybody, if you got what it takes, 'cause I'm Kurtis Blow and I want you to know that these are the breaks....

Each time I watched these opinion makers and Congressional FOX Caucus Members clap and give those hankerchief head smiles for the cameras, I expected them to follow the rest of Curtis blows lyrics, and shout out to the rest of the audience, "Throw your hands up in the sky, and wave "em" 'round from side to side, and if you deserve a break tonight, somebody say alright! (all right) Say ho-oo! (ho-oo!) and you don't stop keep on, somebody Scream!"

More - later today at African American Political Pundit